[Free]

Partner opens 1♦ in 1st seat, RHO passes. You're playing standard 2/1 GF (so NO FANCY CONVENTIONS). You hold:

Scoring: IMP

---

What do you bid?

[awm]

I'll go with 1NT. I think the "textbook" bid with a balanced 11-12 is 2NT, but there are several reasons not to bid that. Besides wrong-siding the potential major suit lead, I don't expect to make 3NT with this hand opposite most balanced 14s. With 4333 shape the conservative action often works out well. While bidding a major could potentially right-side the notrump, it could also lead to playing in a 4-3 major fit with the 3-card holding in a totally flat hand.

[hrothgar]

Hey there... One very quick comment: Many people who play 2/1 game force don't treat 1♦ - 2♣ as game forcing. (Alternatively, if this is game forcing, they use 1♦ - 3♣ as invitational)

On to the hand in question:

The "value" bid is 2N showing balanced hand with roughly 11 HCP. This seems like a great description of the hand. Given all the tens, nines, and eights I certainly prefer 2NT to 1NT. However, I'm worried that both majors are wide open. I have the uncomfortable feeling that NT is going to play a lot better from partner's hand. Even so, I'm not willing to bid 1M on a three card suit with a 3=3=3=4 hand.

I guess that my answer is "it depends". if 2♣ doesn't establish an absolute game force, I'm bidding 2♣. If it does, I'm bidding 2NT.

[mr1303]

I'll go with 2C. Shows where and what my values are pretty well I reckon. If partner passes it, we shouldn't be in too bad a spot.

Edit: thought I was a passed hand. In which case, probably 2D might be better then.

[pbleighton]

Richard's argument for 2C is good, but I still bid the textbook 2NT. It defines shape and strength quite well. 2C tends to show a bunch of clubs, and is unlimited. While 2C isn't a lie, 2NT is more truthful. Also, 1D-2C auctions can be klutzy, and revealing to the opps.

This is definitely what I would do at the table, so why not at the Forum as well

I have to admit, I would like it better if more points were in the majors.

Peter

[bid_em_up]

Why do you want the lead coming to your hand? Bid 2C.

NT needs to play from the other side of the table, if thats where the hand belongs.

Additionally, your values are concentrated in clubs, and 2C portrays this better than 2N will.

[mike777]

1nt easy so far and 100%

[Free]

For those who want to bid 2♣, which is not absolute GF:
What is partner supposed to do with 14HCP? What about 18-19? What about 12?

For those who want to bid 1NT:
What is partner supposed to do with 14HCP? What about 12?

[awm]

My impression is that there are two versions of 2/1 with regard to 2♣:

(1) 2♣ is game force. Invitational hands with no major and no diamond fit bid 2NT (balanced) or 3♣ (long clubs).

(2) 2♣ is game force except suit rebid. Invitational hands with no major and no diamond fit bid 2NT (balanced) or 2♣ followed by 3♣ (long clubs).

In either case opener will not immediately distinguish strength on a balanced hand (2NT by opener over 1♦-2♣ is an acceptable rebid on 12-14 or 18-19) and responder is never going to pass opener's 2NT. If opener rebids 2♦ or 2M then 2NT by responder is forcing to game.

Playing this style, I don't see 2♣ response as a real option. Obviously if you play that "balanced invites with no major go through 2♣" (in which case you may as well play direct 2NT is forcing) then 2♣ is a nice bid, but I don't think this is "standard 2/1" in any case.

Bidding 1NT over 1♦, I expect that opener will pass with a balanced 12-14. I'm bidding this way because I don't expect to make 3NT opposite most balanced 14s, and I expect that if opener has a really nice 14 with a lot of tenaces and a five-card diamond suit he would open 1NT (upgrade). Of course one can quarrel with my hand evaluation (I don't rate unsupported Ts and 9s very highly and I downgrade a LOT for 4333).

[dogsbreath]

hi
I hate 'master-minding' the auction .. very destructive of partnership confidence.
The only bid available to me without special p'ship agreements is 1NT , so thats what i bid.
Rgds Dog

[pbleighton]

"My impression is that there are two versions of 2/1 with regard to 2♣:"

Adam, most of the 2/1 players I know play 1D-2C as forcing for one round, and responder may pass a 2NT rebid by opener (though he typically wouldn't, usaully having 6 cards). I live in the northeast U.S. I guess things are different where you live.

Peter

[pbleighton]

Dog:

What would 2NT mean in your partnership?

Isn't 1NT an underbid with 11 hcp?

Peter

[Kalvan14]

Playing the standard 2/1, I'm quite surprised no one mentioned 2♦ would be Inverted Minor. While it would normally require 4 cards fit, it is quite a good picture of the hand: it does not give a wrong impression in terms of strength (as both 2♣ and 1N would), and right-sides NT (it also stressed the need for major stoppers).

The standard 2/1 does not include 2N as a balanced hand 11-12 (or stronger): 2N is a weak pre-emptive raise in diamonds (the limit raise in diamonds is 3♦, again to right side NT; and the limit raise in clubs is 3♣).

[pbleighton]

"The standard 2/1 does not include 2N as a balanced hand 11-12 (or stronger): 2N is a weak pre-emptive raise in diamonds"

Where do you play, Kalvan? 2N as balanced invitational is standard 2/1 where I live.

Peter

[EricK]

Although you are not playing any fancy conventions, do you have any agreements as to opener's rebids after 1♦ 2♣ (where 2♣ is not GF)?

[whereagles]

Free, on May 21 2006, 11:12 AM, said:

For those who want to bid 2♣, which is not absolute GF:

1.
What is partner supposed to do with 14HCP?

2.
What about 18-19?

3.
What about 12?

French style solution:

1. Rebid 2NT. Shows a balanced good 13 to 14. Now every bid by responder except 3♣ (broken suit) is game-forcing. This includes 3♦, by the way.

2. Rebid 3NT.

3. With balanced 12 or bad 13, open 1♣ despite having 44 minors or 4♦3♣.


Incidently, my problem with this hand isn't whether pard has a balanced hand; it's if he's unbalanced with a singleton in a major. Because of this, I think 2♣ is preferable to some NT bid. Of course, if pard can't play cards, a NT bid is a no-brainer

If it goes

1♦ 2♣
3♦

I'll surely regret my 2♣ bid!!!!!!!

[Free]

I bid 2NT, the classic bid, and everyone passes.

LHO leads ♥4, 4th best.

Scoring: IMP

---

It is now or never: 50% chance for a disaster. Do you play the K or the 5 in dummy?

[whereagles]

The king, wtp? Ah.. of course, since this is a problem, LHO underled QJxx and low is the winning move.. lol.

[Codo]

I had been in 2 NT too and see no reason now to play low from Kx.
Low wins, if the lho has led low from QJx4 or if rho is so bad, that he will play the ace looking at AJx(x).
So I play lho for the ace and take my king now.

[lowerline]

Free, on May 21 2006, 06:12 AM, said:

For those who want to bid 2♣, which is not absolute GF:
What is partner supposed to do with 14HCP?  What about 18-19?  What about 12?

For those who want to bid 1NT:
What is partner supposed to do with 14HCP?  What about 12?

Assuming that 2♣ is 10+ and that you are playing a 15-17 NT-opening, partner's
2NT rebid shows 12-14 and his 3NT rebid shows 18-19. If he makes the 2NT rebid with 14hcp you risk missing 3NT with a total of 24-25hcp. If he makes the 3NT rebid with 14hcp he lies 4hcp and who knows where you end up. This is a typical problem in standard bidding (one that you can solve by playing one of those "fancy methods"). I choose the "practical 3NT" with 14hcp because I hate to miss a game in imps (and probably suffice with 2NT in matchpoints).